R v Tarrant [1912] HCA 59

R v Tarrant [1912] HCA 59

Given the admitted intent to defraud the revenue and the defendants' general reprehensible conduct in relation to customs practices, the maximum statutory penalties should be imposed for each offence under the Customs Act 1901.

Parties
Plaintiff: The King; Defendant: Harley Tarrant; Defendant: William Howard Horatio Lewis; Defendant: William Stuart Ross
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 September 1912
Procedural Posture
Customs Prosecution (action for Penalties) / Judgment After Hearing and Admissions
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff with costs; defendants convicted of the offences charged.
Legal Topics
Penalties for Customs Offences, Customs Agents' Powers and Liabilities, Fraud Upon the Revenue
Customs Law Criminal Law Penalties for Customs Offences Customs Agents' Powers and Liabilities Fraud Upon the Revenue

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The King

Plaintiff

Harley Tarrant

Defendant

William Howard Horatio Lewis

Defendant

William Stuart Ross

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Customs Prosecution (action for Penalties) / Judgment After Hearing and Admissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What penalties are just for proven fraudulent customs entries under the Customs Act 1901?
  2. 2 Can a customs agent declare facts about which they have no personal knowledge under s.180 Customs Act 1901?

Ratio Decidendi

Given the admitted intent to defraud the revenue and the defendants' general reprehensible conduct in relation to customs practices, the maximum statutory penalties should be imposed for each offence under the Customs Act 1901.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff with costs; defendants convicted of the offences charged.

Orders

  • Penalty of £265 18s. imposed for the first offence.
  • Penalty of £200 imposed for the second offence.